Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Love, Joy, Feminism

Home
Nonreligious
The Eclipse of Truth

The Eclipse of Truth

Last updated on: November 20, 2019 at 8:42 am by Libby Anne

The Eclipse of Truth 2019-11-20T08:42:49-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I grew up in a young earth creationist home. I was taught that evolution was, in effect, a conspiracy theory. Young earth creationism made sense. It was simple and easy to understand. In contrast, evolution was complicated. Besides, we gained something through our belief that we knew something others didn’t. It was empowering to believe that we had the answers—that we had found some secret truth.

On some level, then, I’m not surprised at the rise of the flat earth movement—which does not appear to be the joke I initially assumed it surely must be. Distrust of scientists is widespread, not just among young earth creationists but also among climate change deniers and anti-vaxxers. Whatever the reason, people no longer want to believe scientists. And, well, as I said, conspiracy theories are alluring.

It is empowering to believe you have found some secret truth no one else has.

When I left home for college, I found my young earth creationist conviction challenged for the first time. Not by my professors, mind you—the only college science class I was required to take dealt with the history of scientists; I don’t remember it even touching on evolution. No, I was challenged by my peers, who pushed back against my arguments and pointed me to online resources.

According to the internet, there were rock layers laid down in desert conditions, in the midst of sediment I’d been taught was laid down in a global flood. The internet was the internet, but these claims were backed up with citations, references to scientific papers I could—and in some cases did—look up.

You can read the full story of my loss of faith in young earth creationism here, but looking back, what surprises me the most is that I didn’t decide to simply disbelieve these scientific papers. After all, I’d been taught scientists were engaged in a grand conspiracy, hadn’t I? Why didn’t I immediately conclude that scientists were claiming these rock layers were laid down in desert conditions to throw people off the track?

I don’t have an answer. Perhaps part of it boils down to trust. When I’d left home for a secular college, I’d expected to be persecuted for my beliefs. And yet, when I mentioned my belief in young earth creationism in a class I took on multiculturalism, the professor treated me with respect. He didn’t mock me. He didn’t dock my grades. While I didn’t have a reason to bring up young earth creationism in my other classes, I brought up plenty of other talking points honed in my days as an evangelical Christian homeschooler and right-wing teenage political activist, and again, every single one of my professors treated me with respect.

It’s not that none of my professors pushed back against the things I said. They did. It’s just that their interactions with me shattered the image I had had in my head of the secular college professor.

While it was my peers who challenged my young earth creationist beliefs, not my professors, it’s likely that the dissonance between what my interaction with my professors looked like and what I’d thought it would look like made me more willing to assume that maybe, just maybe, scientists writing individual papers on individual topics did so based on evidence and observation, and and not pure conspiratorial propaganda.

Today, though, I’m worried. The anti-vaxxer movement has grown to the point that it is undermining public health, leading to a slew of think pieces analyzing why so many people have stopped believing scientists. Our societal unwillingness to move on climate change is also related to a disbelief of scientists—and as scientists grow more dire and worried in their predictions, I fear this may only grow worse.

And then there are the flat earthers. Never in a million years would I have thought an actual, genuine, bona fide flat earth movement would gain footing in western society. And yet—apparently—here we are. The conspiracy theory is spreading, and people are getting high on the belief that they and they alone are in on a colossal secret. They and they alone understand how the world actually works. I get it. It’s exhilarating.

It’s also wrong.

I’m worried for another reason, though. It’s actually what prompted me to write this post. I’d saved an article on the flat earth movement right next to an article on Mick Mulvaney lying about the process that resulted in the selection of Trump’s Doral resort for the next G-7 summit. As my eyes scanned the list, the two felt associated in my mind. Something connected them. What was it? It’s the eclipse of truth.

Remember Mick Mulvaney’s October 17th press conference? I do.

Now, let’s talk about the site selection process because I know you folks will ask some questions about that. How do we go about doing this? First of all, we use a lot of the same criteria that have been used by past administrations. There’s a long list of the accommodations on site: the ballrooms, bilateral rooms, the number of rooms, the photo ops, the support hotels that are there, the proximity to cities and airports, helicopter landing zones, medical facilities, et cetera.

So we use the same set of criteria that previous administrations have used. We started with a list of about a dozen, just on paper. And we sent an advance team out to actually visit 10 locations in several states. We visited California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Michigan, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Utah. Now, we got that list down to just under 10, and the advance team went out to visit those. And from there, we got down to four finalists that our senior team went out to look at. They looked at — I think it was one in Hawaii, two in Utah, and then the Mar-a-Lago facility in Florida.

And it became apparent at the end of that process that Doral was, by far and away — far and away — the best physical facility for this meeting. In fact, I was talking to one of the advance teams when they came back, and I said, “What was it like?” And they said, “Mick, you’re not going to believe this, but it’s almost like they built this facility to host this type of event.”

It came out last week, when Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington obtained copies of secret services emails via FOIA requests, that Mulvaney’s description of the process was false.

In reality, the team tasked with evaluating locations did 10 site surveys in May and June. They made their list of sites to survey, one would assume, based on the “same criteria that have been used by past administrations” referenced by Mulvaney, but, importantly, Doral did not make that list.

After the site visits they narrowed the list to four—sites in Hawaii, Utah, California, and North Carolina. They then cut two, leaving the sites in Hawaii and Utah. At that point, when they had already surveyed sites using their ordinary process and narrowed the list to two, they “added Miami on the back end.”

In other words, this was not their normal process, as Mulvaney claimed. Doral was added at the last minute, after the initial sites had been selected (based on conventional criteria), surveyed, and narrowed down.

Doral, the email said, “does present some challenges.” The email also noted that the president would have the final decision, after they presented the results of their site surveys and findings, something Mulvaney conveniently left out in his eagerness to insist that the selection was wholly independent and normal.

To the Trump administration, truth appears to be a pesky, irrelevant detail. I could have used a million other examples of blatant lies like this. This one just happened to be stored next to the article about the flat earth movement in my links list. Truth literally does not matter to the administration.

What does this have to do with the flat earth movement? Not much, on the surface. A lot more, when you dig down. If truth does not matter and lies are everywhere, how do you decide who to trust? For decades now, the Right has been sewing distrust of scientists and of the media. Now, that distrust seems to have reached a point where truth no longer even matters. Reality becomes warped. Does it even exist?

It’s no wonder, in this context, that conspiracy theories like anti-vaxxing and the flat earth movement have gone into hyperdrive. There is no truth. There is only deciding who you trust—whose lies you believe.

And that is a terrifying proposition.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!

Politics

conspiracy theory

Previous Post

November 19, 2019

Trump's Israel Policy Looks Suspiciously Evangelical

Next Post

November 21, 2019 Is There Hidden Meaning in the New Testament?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who built an ark to survive the great flood?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Enoch Shem Abram Noah